EPT[GSL] Code A Ro32 Day 1 / Code S Ro32 Group B - Page 63
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44184 Posts
| ||
|
supersoft
Germany3729 Posts
Maybe someone forgot to separate it... I'd be pretty angry if I were the season3 liquibet champion... who I am unfortunately not :D edit: On January 03 2011 23:10 mustache wrote: wrong. it's streamlined mechanics reduce the skill needed for macro and micro. it in no way increases what is possible. what is possible is defined by the skill of the player. I don't think, that less skill is needed for macro and micro... Players are incredibly far away from playing perfect. With perfect I mean microing every single unit all at one time, spreading, flanking, zero reaction time etc. while macroing with zero reaction time. In relation to SC1, SC2 is microheavier because the more effort you put in your macro doesn't result in that much profit you could gain with putting the same effort in your micro. (ofc that's only the case for maybe the top 1% of all players out there) I agree, that the streamlined mechanics don't increase what is possible at all, but they increase what is humanly possible. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On January 04 2011 05:43 robertdinh wrote: Let me break it down for you... SC2 is much more RPS, one slight build order mistake is far more condemning far more frequently than in a game like BW, where build order is important, but the players also have the room to adapt (partially because of map size a lot of the time and the general meta game) Using BO1s for a game like SC2 which is still in it's infancy and has cramped maps and is so build order dependent, is much more inaccurate than using it in the much more stable and developed BW. They should have at least done Bo3s, and also, while BW is a more stable and developed rts, doesn't mean BO1 is great for it either. Just cause BW may or may not use a bad format, doesn't mean GSL has to copy it just for the sake of copying it. I just think if you want a competitive tourney, it shouldn't be BO1 group stages, and furthermore it should let all the matches play out where they might matter. It isn't fair that if you get matched vs a monster in the later set of matches in group stage you may or may not actually have to play him, while others had to. What are you talking about? Everyone 1 group all fight each other at least once. A v B, C v D, then the next match is A v C and B v D. They all fight each other at least once. Saying it's not the same is an OPINION. They can't have an opinion on how the game is balanced right now and just have their tournament work out that way, because that will favor other players and certain maps they have to play on. Why not just follow traditional structure which works fine. | ||
|
estee
Korea (South)449 Posts
 BoxeR hwaiting! | ||
|
supersoft
Germany3729 Posts
On January 04 2011 07:26 estee wrote: Hey guys I won't be able to make today's LR thread as I'll be on a flight BoxeR hwaiting! haha, silence, noone wants to take the job :D I would do it, but I got to go to university tomorrow. Have a good flight! And thank you for the nice threads so far! | ||
|
robertdinh
803 Posts
On January 04 2011 06:52 Silidons wrote: What are you talking about? Everyone 1 group all fight each other at least once. A v B, C v D, then the next match is A v C and B v D. They all fight each other at least once. Saying it's not the same is an OPINION. They can't have an opinion on how the game is balanced right now and just have their tournament work out that way, because that will favor other players and certain maps they have to play on. Why not just follow traditional structure which works fine. The point is that their round robin system is not a true round robin. This can be seen in Group A of S-class, where because nestea won his first 2 games, he didn't have to play anymore. And the person who was supposed to play him last, instead got to play a different player. Whereas the other 2 people had to actually play him and got losses from it. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On January 03 2011 23:10 mustache wrote: wrong. it's streamlined mechanics reduce the skill needed for macro and micro. it in no way increases what is possible. what is possible is defined by the skill of the player. ...it may decrease the "skill" needed for a single action, but by doing that, it increases the total amount of stuff you can do. i don't see where your "wrong" comes from. | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
On January 04 2011 04:53 koppik wrote: I'd really like the new format . . . if it were Bo3s. But I guess that would take forever to air. It's sad to see Fruitdealer get knocked out in the first round, but he just didn't play well. Maka's bottom placement is a bit more tragic, I guess. He played well against NesTea, even if he wasn't able to win it. Yes, but FD got one of the worst maps and the worst position v a very, very competent T. On the other hand Nestea played lesser Ts on Blistering Sands, both games. I mean, at that position on Lost Temple, Z really can't do much against T. (Nestea lost a game to Maka in GSL 3 in a similar situation on LT) Tank push, MMM push, Marine/SCV rush, Bunker push, Thor drop, Tank drop, Banshee shenanigans, Marine/Hellion push, etc. Everything is viable in that spawn and can be deadly against a Z who guesses wrong. All T needs is a single scan before moving out. I did not watch the game but I've read that Artosis said something like "FD is living in his past laurel" or something in that line after FD lost the game. Well, maybe. Or maybe not. But would he say the same if it was Idra in that position? Because I highly doubt any Z would have fared better on those spawns against a semi-competent T. But I certainly would not think Idra is living in his past achievement even if he had lost to IMmvp in that situation. | ||
|
mols0n
Canada388 Posts
| ||
|
Cyanocyst
2222 Posts
Though as far as i know, there isn't that much of a difference between 1st and 2nd in a group. So its possible that Zenio didn't exert himself too much, since he may have to face MVP in a more important game later. Still i feel as though FD would have handled himself better than Zenio in a macro game with MvP. Really hope all the top Zergs learn how to eat 2 rax for breakfast soon, really tired of those games. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
and now we have zenio in the ro.16... | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
On January 04 2011 10:08 Cyanocyst wrote: However i guess i'm a bit mad at Zenio for playing so shitty vs MVP. He got through by winning vs Zerg's, but if that performance is indicative of his ZvT all he managed to do was reduce the chance of Zerg's going far. I agree totally. I watched the replays of Zenio's DH games, and his micro is absolutely atrocious. I could see he's a hard-working gamer (all oGs members are), but you have no choice but to see his non-existent micro during many battles. (a-move everything in one control group, including infestors, ugh) FD, Idra, Nestea are much better Zs than Zenio in my mind. | ||
|
Deekin[
Serbia1713 Posts
| ||
|
rysecake
United States2632 Posts
| ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On January 04 2011 10:25 1Eris1 wrote: awesome, just awesome. MVP gets a 90% win map vs FD and then the rest of FD's group is zergs. and now we have zenio in the ro.16... Uhh.. What exactly is wrong with Zenio being in the ro16? Apparently he's been doing extremely well according to teammates, but has yet to show for it thus far on the big stage. I'm glad to see Zenio advancing. Who cares if he seems like a tool or something because of his personal style. | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
| ||
|
bahl sofs tiil
United States233 Posts
| ||
|
ThunderGod
New Zealand897 Posts
| ||
|
Koshi
Belgium38799 Posts
On January 04 2011 07:26 estee wrote: Hey guys I won't be able to make today's LR thread as I'll be on a flight BoxeR hwaiting! Noesss, now we will probably be stuck in this thread today... | ||
|
BenKen
United States860 Posts
On January 04 2011 16:13 Koshi wrote: Noesss, now we will probably be stuck in this thread today... LOL we are so spoiled by estee's skill and dedication. | ||
| ||
